Communication is everywhere all the time. Storytellers are experts in intuiting the rules and theories of communication, but so often we fail to reflect on the academic theories of communication and how they impact our practice.
In this series, I want to explore a number of communication theories and their roles in storytelling performance. I'll do my best to give credit where it is due* without bogging y'all down with high-falutin language.
I start with Expectancy Violations Theory. This one has gone on... a journey of sorts. Judee Burgoon introduced the idea way back a bit. At first, this theory of hers was simple. It had tow main ideas.
First: We all have personal space, and that personal space is shaped different and may be bigger or smaller based on where we're from, what we're like, and who we know.
Second: We all have this weird conflicting need to keep people out of our space and all up in our space.
Then, Edward Hall came along, and he pulled out a big ruler, and he tried to figure out the average size of an American's personal space. He assigned measurements to 4 different zones of comfort (he called them proxemic zones). The smallest one was the "intimate distance." He said that, the space 18 inches or fewer away from an American was the space reserved for intimate relationships. Basically, only people an American is SUPER cozy with are allowed in this area. 18.5 inches though? Probably a chill place for someone to stand when having a normal conversation. There were other zones too. Hall said that standing 20 feet away would make a normal conversation a little weird.
Halls exact measurements fell out of the conversation fairly quickly. They didn't really hold up to much scrutiny, but the idea that different zones exist and certain people in certain contexts belong in certain spaces, that stuck around.
For a while, it many believed that any violation a persons safe standing space would result in the person being approach having a physiological response of stress. Think about how you would react if a stranger who smelled like burnt chocolate and old gym socks stood behind you and sniffed your hair....that feeling. It was believed that any intrusion of the inner zone would result in that feeling.
Even though the early iterations of the theory were a little too exact and a little too prescriptive, the Expectancy Violations Theory we have now is pretty observable and pretty dang useful.
Now, the theory states that people expect people to behave in certain ways during a conversation. When people do not act as expected, the person whose expectation has been violated quickly reevaluates the relationship they have with the violator. Yes, this still applies to where people stand, but also applies to other things people might do.
Not all violations are bad. Sometimes, people stand further away than we think they should, and it makes us feel a little safer. We might find that we like them more in a leadership role than in a close collaborator role. Sometimes, people get very close to us, and we realize that we really like their closeness and that we might want to explore a more intimate relationship. A great way to flirt is to offer to put a tasty treat in someone's mouth. Why? because it violates expectation and invites the food receiver to ask if they maybe want you up close more often (proceed with caution, this does not constitute professional relationship advice).
Now, how does this impact tellers? When we are telling to an audience of people we do not know, we need to spend most of our time at a distance that is appropriate. If we set up a microphone or some object that will indicate where we will be standing before the show, each audience member can choose a seat that places you in the best location for their comfort. Then, it is up to us to determine if and how their expectations will be violated. This needs to be an educate assumption. Some audiences do not want us going into the aisles or getting close to their faces. Others are eight drinks in, and SOOOOO hoping we'll cause them a bit of good discomfort. We have to feel it in the ways they move when and if we start to approach. We must also accept and any violation CAN have a negative reaction. If we get too close or go too far away, we can lose a great audience member forever.
I saw a teller once go into the audience and sit on the lap of a watcher. This did NOT go well. The audience, mostly college students, had been trained to value consent, and that violation crossed a line. The teller seemed to think the move was "provocative" and meant to make people "think" about their arbitrary boundaries, instead it created a room full of people who never wanted to see the teller again. I've seen another teller do much the same thing at a late-night cabaret to a very receptive audience who gave nonverbal signals that they were open to and requesting such violations.
I won't say whether either teller was wrong or right. This post isn't meant to be a discussion of ethics, only of a tool that we can all use when planning our performances.
*Huge shout out to Em Griffin whose A First Look book was my introduction to communication theory and whose writing greatly influenced the structure of this post!
Comments